In a Parched World, We Have to Value Every Drophttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/in-a-parched-world-we-have-to-value-every-drop
The world is getting thirstier and we’re fast running out of ways to quench it. A rapidly growing population, too many competing demands, and climate change impacts are creating a water availability emergency that the World Economic Forum recently ranked as the world’s “top global risk.”The world is getting thirstier and we’re fast running out of ways to quench it.

A rapidly growing population, too many competing demands, and climate change impacts are creating a water availability emergency that the World Economic Forum recently ranked as the world’s “top global risk.”

The fact that more than one billion people already live in water-stressed regions – and that this number is expected to double or triple by 2025, according to the UN – is just one dimension of this colossal threat.

There’s also social and economic disruption. California is now in the fourth year of a devastating drought that left a half-million acres of farmland unplanted last year, causing more than $1.5 billion of economic losses. Water-deprived Texas is riding the wave of a hydraulic fracturing boom, but it’s leaving less water for farmers and communities. Meanwhile, China’s water problems are already costing the country about 2.3 percent of its annual GDP.

“So much of life is affected by what happens with water,” said Robert Sandford, a leading thinker on water in Canada, speaking at this year’s World Economic Forum. “We didn’t realize until recently how much our economy and society relied on hydrologic stability.”

Tackling these global water challenges will require a major shift in how freshwater is managed, allocated, priced, litigated and, ultimately, used. It means finding regulatory and market mechanisms that ensure water’s true worth — to human life, ecosystems as well as economic well-being — is appropriately valued.

Re-thinking how we value water is a critical first step. Water is a finite and precious resource, but our economic systems treat it as limitless and of little value. For many companies and other water users, their water bills are so small that it hardly seems worthwhile to conserve. The result is unsustainable water use across much of our global economy — from industry to agriculture to homeowners.

Ceres is bringing unique capital market solutions to these challenges. Through cutting-edge research and direct engagement with the business community, we are pushing to change the way that companies and public entities manage water, and the way that investors consider water availability and water quality risks in their investment decisions. One of our key pillars for working with the business sector is the Ceres Aqua Gauge, which provides an easy and efficient way for companies to assess and improve their water risk management strategies.

In the United States, we are focused on three key sectors that use the vast majority of the country’s water — public water utilities, the energy sector and agriculture. Taken together, these sectors are responsible for more than 90 percent of the nation’s water consumption. By improving their water practices, we can build an economy that protects freshwater for future generations.

Agriculture has long been the country’s biggest water user, especially in the Midwest and West, where many of our primary food staples are grown. California’s agriculture sector alone generates $36 billion a year of revenue and produces nearly half of US-grown fruits, nuts and vegetables.

No doubt, American farmers are using water more efficiently. A recent study by the US Department of Agriculture, for example, showed a 9 percent drop in the irrigated water use nationally since 1998. Still, with increasingly intense droughts and groundwater supplies under pressure like never before, the industry’s overall water footprint is not sustainable, creating long-term risks for ecosystems and the economy alike.

Ceres has been especially focused on the corn sector, the nation’s biggest crop by far. Last year U.S. corn growers harvested a record 14.2 billion bushels, using one-third of America’s cropland (an area twice the size of Florida.) Nearly 40 percent of the corn is for feeding cows, pigs and chicken, with another 35 percent being sold to ethanol refiners to meet government-mandated blending requirements for our nation’s gasoline supplies. Less than 10 percent is for direct human consumption

But, as a Ceres report released last year makes clear, the corn sector’s water practices are taking an enormous toll.

The industry uses vast amounts of fertilizer, far more than any other agriculture sector. In states like Iowa, nitrate runoff is polluting streams, rivers and water supplies – so much, in fact, that the Des Moines water utility recently threatened to sue three counties for polluting its primary water source, the Raccoon River. Corn-related runoff is also the single largest source of pollution to the Gulf of Mexico’s “dead zone,” an area the size of Connecticut that is essentially devoid of life.

Lack of water is another problem, especially in Kansas, Texas, Colorado and Nebraska, which rely on fragile groundwater aquifers to irrigate their cornfields. The Ceres report showed that more than half of the country’s irrigated corn production, worth more than $9 billion a year, depends on groundwater from the Ogallala aquifer where groundwater levels are declining.

Unfortunately, climate change will likely add to these pressures. Numerous studies conclude that the negative impacts of climate change on agricultural production in the Midwest will outweigh the positive impacts.

Tackling these wide-ranging water challenges requires stronger state and federal regulations, but progress in this regard has been painfully slow. Ceres believes the biggest catalyst for change is the industry itself – in particular, the food, feed and energy companies which buy most of the nation’s corn and have an enormous stake in ensuring that corn production is reliable and sustainable.

Companies such as Coca-Cola, General Mills and Unilever have all set voluntary goals to sustainably source all of their priority agricultural ingredients – including corn – by 2020. With our guidance, PepsiCo has launched a sustainable farming initiative that aims to reduce water and fertilizer use by its growers all over the world. We’re also encouraged by public/private partnerships such as Field to Market, which recently announced an ambitious effort to accelerate sustainable growing practices on 20 percent of the nation’s farmland — 50 million acres — by 2020.

*******

How the country’s tens of thousands of public water utilities manage water use by residential and business customers is another key focus of Ceres’ work.

U.S. water utilities have long operated on the assumption of ever-increasing water demand and limitless water supplies, which meant they could sell more water, which meant they would have more revenues to pay their bills. That assumption worked in the 20th century when water was cheap and plentiful, and the federal government was willing to bankroll expensive water supply projects that made cities like Los Angeles and Phoenix possible.

But times have changed. Water supplies in many parts of the country, especially the arid West, are dropping like the rings on an emptying bathtub. And developing new water sources is becoming far more costly, the result of federal funds drying up and the water itself needing to be piped longer distances.

The San Antonio Water System, for example, recently signed a contract with a Spanish company, Abengoa, to build a 140-mile-long pipeline at a cost of $3.4 billion to move groundwater across Central Texas to San Antonio.

For the past few years, Ceres has been highlighting the financial risks of going further afield for water, beginning with its groundbreaking 2010 report, The Ripple Effect: Water Risk in the Municipal Bond Market. The report, done in collaboration with Water Asset Management, is designed to help bond-rating agencies; utilities and investors understand the long-term financial risks of trying to manage water shortages by building new water supply projects.

But Ceres also recognizes that utilities need better tools to avoid these costly projects while meeting future water demand.

Many utilities are raising water rates and enacting water conservation programs to limit to water demand. These approaches are sensible in many ways, but they have an unintended consequence: decreased water use reduces the revenues that water utilities need to pay their bills.

Clearly, water conservation is a far less costly approach to managing limited water availability than expensive new water-supply projects. But water utilities, which traditionally balance their budgets based on how much water they sell, must then shoulder the burden of too little revenue.

Ceres is working with utilities to solve this financing conundrum. Through the CFO Connect project, Ceres is working directly with water utilities in Colorado, Utah and Texas to develop new pricing models that will allow them to achieve a dual goal of revenue stability and water conservation that will reduce long-term water costs for consumers.

A shining example of this is Aurora, CO, which in response to a prolonged drought replaced its traditional water pricing structure with a block rate system. An average-sized home now pays $5.27 per thousand gallons if it uses up to 20,000 gallons, $6 per thousand gallons for up to 40,000 gallons and $7.50 thereafter. The city has also changed its water connection fees by charging less if it’s a small home with xeriscaping (landscaping that doesn’t require watering) and more if it has a big house with a large lawn.

*******

Hydraulic fracturing energy production, which uses significant water for each of its oil and gas extraction wells, is the new kid on the block in tapping the country’s limited freshwater resources.

A report issued by Ceres last year showed that the industry is using significant amounts of water in parched states like Texas and Colorado where fracking is booming.

Based on water-use data from nearly 40,000 fracking wells, the report showed that over 55 percent of the wells were in regions experiencing drought and 36 percent in regions with significant groundwater depletion. Water-use impacts were especially large at local levels, sometimes exceeding the water used by all residents in some Texas and Colorado counties.

The report has had an important role in motivating local communities and policymakers to look more closely at the industry’s water sourcing impacts and the urgency for reducing them. Texas is especially focused, for example, on minimizing groundwater impacts and examining current groundwater permitting loopholes, which allow companies to use as much water as they want for fracking. California has improved its water sourcing reporting requirements and is scrutinizing the practice of providing industry exemptions in an effort to protect vulnerable aquifers from fracking-related wastewater disposal.

The report has also helped in getting improvements from the industry itself, such as the company Apache, which is now recycling 100 percent of its fracking wastewater in key regions, such as the Permian Basin in West Texas.

Clearly, however, the industry should be doing more to substantially improve its on-the-ground practices. Failing to do so will almost certainly put the industry’s growth and limited freshwater supplies in states like Colorado and Texas on a collision course.

]]>No publisherBrooke Barton2015-03-02T15:34:26ZPress ClipCeres 2011-2012 Sustainability Reporthttp://www.ceres.org/about-us/financials/ceres-2011-2012-sustainability-report
The 2011-2012 Ceres Sustainability Report includes data that describe our progress over the period 2011-2012 toward reaching specific goals associated with a set of key performance indicators. In addition, the report offers a self-evaluation of organizational performance relative to relevant expectations set forth in the Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability.The 2011-2012 Ceres Sustainability Report includes data that describe our progress over the period 2011-2012 toward reaching specific goals associated with a set of key performance indicators. In addition, the report offers a self-evaluation of organizational performance relative to relevant expectations set forth in the Ceres Roadmap for Sustainability.]]>No publisherMegan Dohertysustainability report2015-02-25T15:13:10ZResourceCiti's $100 Billion Downpayment On Clean Energy Futurehttp://www.ceres.org/press/blog-posts/citis-100-billion-downpayment-on-clean-energy-future
Knowing the world needs to invest an additional trillion dollars per year into clean energy by 2030 might sound daunting. This week, however, we saw a down payment on that clean energy future we so desperately need: a new $100 billion environmental finance initiative announced by one of the world’s largest financial institutions, Citigroup.Knowing the world needs to invest an additional trillion dollars per year into clean energy by 2030 might sound daunting. This week, however, we saw a down payment on that clean energy future we so desperately need: a new $100 billion environmental finance initiative announced by one of the world’s largest financial institutions, Citigroup.

In 2007, Citi set a similar goal: to lend, invest, and facilitate $50 billion by 2016. The company met that goal three years early, and is now upping the ante by doubling its commitment. Citi is showing that investing in clean energy is smart business, and that – with a bit of ambition and commitment – it can be done right now. It’s a clear market signal that should resonate with the industry.

Ceres President Mindy Lubber addresses NGOs, investors and business partners at Citi event in NYC

At Ceres, we advocate for sustainability leadership. We work with corporations and investors to better integrate sustainability into business planning to build a sustainable global economy. Ceres supported the development of Citi’s sustainability strategy over the past several years, in large part by bringing together investors, NGOs and other experts to have a “no holds barred” discussion about the company’s vision for leadership in the financial services sector.

I joined Citi CEO Michael Corbat in New York this week as he announced the strategy, which will include – among other things – financing for large renewable-energy projects such as municipal infrastructure to reduce water waste; assistance for clients to address environmental risks; and an 80 percent absolute greenhouse gas reduction target.

Citi has a long road ahead as it strives to meet its goals, but this $100 billion commitment is bold and bigger than what we’ve seen before. It’s a critical step in the right direction, and shows what corporate leaders are capable of when they put their minds to it.

To be sure, Citi and its peers have a tremendous role to play in battling climate change. Now, we must call on the financial services industry to do more. We all share the responsibility of addressing climate change.

Last month, Bloomberg New Energy Finance released the clean energy investment numbers for 2014. The good news? clean energy investment jumped 16%, to $310 billion, in 2014, a near all-time high. The bad news? It’s just not enough.

Financial institutions must evaluate carbon asset risk in their portfolios and continue to move money into the clean energy projects we need to keep our economy moving forward, not stuck in the past. Together, we need to foster the growth of a credible, sustainable green bonds market.

Companies around the world must invest in clean energy solutions throughout their supply chains, setting measurable, time-bound goals to reduce emissions; improve the energy efficiency of operations; reduce electricity demand; and source renewable energy.

Investors must accelerate the transition to a clean energy economy by managing climate risks in their portfolios, investing in clean energy opportunities that offer competitive risk-adjusted returns across asset classes, and engaging with companies to improve their practices on clean energy and climate change.

Policymakers need to level the playing field by adopting policies that accelerate and expand investment in clean energy. We need policies that stimulate investment in energy efficiency, renewable energy and clean transportation; and put a limit and price on greenhouse gas emissions. And let’s not forget: it’s time for a global climate deal. And we have our chance this year in Paris.

We need more of the kinds of leadership demonstrated by Citi this week – across the financial services industry and beyond. There is strength in numbers, and the only way to protect the economy and environment for ourselves and future generations is to scale up our collective efforts. Here’s to always striving for bigger, better and bolder when it comes to securing that future.

]]>No publisherMindy S. Lubber JD, MBAclean trillion2015-02-20T17:10:00ZBlog ClipInside Citi’s plan to deploy $100 billion for cities, renewables, climatehttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/inside-citi2019s-plan-to-deploy-100-billion-for-cities-renewables-climate
Today, Citi, the global banking giant, is announcing its next-gen sustainability strategy that includes an eye-popping number: $100 billion over 10 years for “lending, investing and facilitating” activities focused on mitigating climate and other sustainability solutions.Today, Citi, the global banking giant, is announcing its next-gen sustainability strategy that includes an eye-popping number: $100 billion over 10 years for “lending, investing and facilitating” activities focused on mitigating climate and other sustainability solutions.

Citi’s financial commitment is part of a larger five-year plan the bank is launching at an event this morning in New York. It outlines three “strategic priorities” for the bank that it says aligns the company’s corporate and sustainability strategies: combating climate change, championing sustainable cities, and promoting social progress, including “universal human rights.”

This isn’t Citi’s first sustainability strategy — or its first big financial commitment. Eight years ago, it made a $50 billion, 10-year pledge to invest in and finance projects that reduce global carbon emission; it met that goal last year, three years early.

The company long has been ahead of the curve. It was one of the first major banks to set reduction goals for energy, waste and water. In 2003, it was one of 10 global banks — and the only U.S. company — to sign the Equator Principles, a framework to help financial institutions manage environmental and social risk in project finance.

The new $100 billion goal “builds on the learnings that we accumulated during the first $50 billion,” Val Smith, director of corporate sustainability at Citi, told me recently.

“When we knew that we were going to hit the $50 billion goal three years early, we did an assessment across our different businesses. We wanted to expand the scope of the $100 billion goal so that we could capture a lot of other activities that are very important to people, that are very important to cities, that our clients are deeply engaged in.”

The group cast a broad net, looking across industry sectors, including the energy and cleantech sectors that had been the focus of the previous investment goal, Smith said. “We also wanted to include some of the innovative work that we're doing with our municipal clients, and some of the green bond work and other areas that are important to communities around the world.”

Smith and her colleagues are quick to point out that Citi isn’t lowering its standards to fund these projects.

“We're only going to do business that makes sense for Citi as a regulated financial institution,” said Marshal Salant, global head of Citi Alternative Energy Finance. “We're not going to do business that's not economic just to hit an environmental goal. But we will look at more possible alternatives, and if they pass our hurdles we're going to pursue them.”

Salant noted, “We’re very focused on energy efficiency because that's the low-hanging fruit. It's hard to get corporations to focus on that, but by helping them finance their improvements, we not only allow them to do it but we allow them to do much more.”

Citi for Cities

Another big focus of Citi’s sustainability efforts are, perhaps appropriately, cities. The company’s Citi for Cities program draws upon the company’s expertise in providing financing and advisory solutions to cities around the world.

“For example, instead of doing a giant, multi-billion-dollar wastewater treatment plant, cities are doing things like changing the tax code based on permeable square footage that a building occupies,” explained Pam Flaherty, who recently retired as Citi’s director of corporate citizenship. “Or instead of building new parking garages, they're figuring out how to use sensors so that people can better understand where there's a parking space.

“You take those, and then you take different kinds of innovative finance, and the challenge for cities is how to put those things together. We at Citi have the financing knowledge, so we're helping them put it together in a very practical way.”

Bonds — green bonds

One financing mechanism is “green bonds,” a type of financial asset designed to fund a wide range of environmental initiatives and projects. In early 2014, Citi was one of four banks that helped draft the Green Bond Principles, a set of voluntary guidelines on the development and issuance of green bonds. They encourage transparency, disclosure and integrity in the development of the green bond market.

Salant sees a rise in green-bond financing, a trend we noted in this year’s State of Green Business report. For Citi, it represents one part of the company’s financing tool kit. Salant used solar energy as an example to describe the various ways Citi might deploy funding to that technology.

“We could loan $100 million to a specific project. Or we might do an initial public offering for a solar company and help them raise money. Or we might lead a bond deal in the private placement market with institutional investors. Or we might finance a green bond for the World Bank.”

He continued: “We're already starting to see states like New York, California, Connecticut and Massachusetts talk about doing green bonds, where they'll raise money specifically for green purposes. Corporates are finding that they have projects where they want to use [green bond] money for things that are environmentally proactive.”

Old King Coal

There’s another side of this, of course. I asked Smith, Salant and Flaherty about the elephant in the room: Citi, like all other banks, isn’t getting out of the business of lending to fossil-fuel companies. How does that stack up to all these environmental initiatives and commitments?

“We are a big financier of energy around the world, and many of our clients may be involved in coal,” said Flaherty. “But some of the leading companies are also leading in moving towards renewable energy. What all of us are trying to do is increasingly shift this complicated market towards more of the environmentally friendly technologies.”

Flaherty pointed to the company’s Environmental and Social Risk Management (ESRM) unit, which sets the firm’s environmental and social risk policies and procedures and works closely with bankers to advise clients on meeting international best practices. Citi was the first U.S.-based financial institution to develop a comprehensive ESRM Standard.

The company has a well-developed process for managing environmental and social risks in transactions. Its bankers and risk managers review transactions subject to the ESRM Standard, giving each an A, B or C grade. If gaps are found in a client’s environmental and social plans, policies or practices, the ESRM unit and the client agree on an “Environmental and Social Action Plan” to fill the gaps.

“We think we do environmental risk management as well or better than anybody in the business,” said Flaherty.

“We've always been pretty forthright about our financing of the energy sector, the really fundamental part of the global economy,” said Smith. "We try really hard to be transparent about this activity.” She explained that under the new strategy, Citi is committing “to increasingly include portfolio-level review for high-risk sectors, so that we, our bankers, our risk managers, our clients, are all on top of these risk and are managing them appropriately.”

Moreover, she said, the new strategy also commits the bank “to establish an early-warning system for emerging trends and risks so that we're continuing to stay on top of these risks and are helping to advise our clients on these as well.”

Banking as usual?

Reviewing Citi’s new commitments, I began to wonder how much all this was simply business as usual — after all, lending, investing and managing risk is what banks do. The fact that more of it is going into environmental initiatives is simply a matter of going where the market is.

Smith and her colleagues disagreed with that assessment. The new commitments, they said, represent a thorough integration of sustainability into business strategy.

“This is the first time that we're publishing a multi-year strategy that aligns a lot of activities across Citi's different businesses into one cohesive document,” said Smith. She pointed out that Citi has a number of operational footprint goals and other initiatives that are tied to the company’s sustainability strategy.

Moreover, she noted, the strategy was developed using a multi-stakeholder process. “We worked with Ceres during 2014 to convene a pretty diverse group of stakeholders, including advocacy NGOs, clients and investors. We pulled them all together and gave them a draft of the strategy with the goals and asked them for their feedback.”

Smith added: “Citi has had about 15 years of hard work and engagement on environmental and sustainability issues. We got to a point where we had this groundswell of activity that we could leverage to get even more innovation.”

Some of that leverage may be inside the company itself: The audience for the new commitments and goals is employees as much as external stakeholders, said Pam Flaherty.

“Part of this is aimed at enhancing and changing the culture internally so that this is increasingly embedded in all nooks and crannies across the company. It's part of the way we do business. The power of getting everybody internally behind something here is amazing.”

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-02-18T18:03:27ZPress ClipThe market doesn't charge for Florida's climate riskhttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/the-market-doesnt-charge-for-floridas-climate-risk
Twenty-year government bonds and thirty-year mortgages are bumping into the horizons for serious damage to South Florida from rising seas. So far, those enormous risks haven’t sent home prices tumbling, or sent borrowing costs skyrocketing.

"It doesn’t get us down to human time scale of, 'What decade will it happen?'" he says. "Or, 'What year will it happen?'"

As a Fort Lauderdale home-owner, Englander thinks that uncertainty works to his advantage, for now. He thinks he might sell in five or ten years — to get out while the getting is good — and he thinks his case isn’t unusual. Even though the typical mortgage is 30 years, many home-owners think about their investment in five-year increments.

That’s the same horizon bond-rating agencies use when they evaluate public-works plans. That's as far as they can look, says Geoff Buswick, who runs the public-finance infrastructure group at Standard and Poors.

"Once you get past that, the financial forecasts are softer," he says. "Fifteen years from now, it could be a completely different management team, and a completely different environment."

There’s a reason big investors are OK with a five-year evaluations of what may be, on paper, a bond with a 20, or 30 or 100-year payoff.

"Everyone thinks they’re going to be the first to realize where the risk is, the first to liquidate," says Leurig. "And that there will be an opportunity to roll that capital into the next thing, which will be less risky."

Keith London seems like someone who should be especially concerned about the risks of South Florida real estate. He’s a city commissioner and longtime homeowner in the Miami suburb of Hallandale Beach. Rising seas have already required some big spending there, just to protect the city’s drinking water supply.

But he doesn’t think his town has it worse. Just first.

"We are the canary in the coal mine," he says. "We have all the issues and all the problems. But this is a bigger problem than just South Florida. There’s going to be global disruptions, everywhere."

He hopes that means global mobilization to address the challenges.

Meanwhile, he thinks South Florida is a fine place to live.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-02-17T14:20:40ZPress ClipCorn Remains King in USDA Irrigation Surveyhttp://www.ceres.org/press/blog-posts/corn-remains-king-in-usda-irrigation-survey
It’s no secret that our agricultural industry is very thirsty, gobbling up 80 percent of the freshwater that America consumes each year. It takes a lot of water to feed the nation, and every five years we get an accounting of just how much it takes, for what crops and at what cost, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey.It’s no secret that our agricultural industry is very thirsty, gobbling up 80 percent of the freshwater that America consumes each year. It takes a lot of water to feed the nation, and every five years we get an accounting of just how much it takes, for what crops and at what cost, from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey. The latest survey, released in November, shows an overall positive trend of irrigation water use declining, even as water use for certain crops, like corn, continues to soar.

Corn used 14 percent more irrigation water in 2013 than in 2008, according to survey results, while water use for all crops combined declined 3.7 percent (and 9 percent since 1998, the highest year on record). Those are remarkable findings considering corn production also used more irrigation water than any other crop.

American farmers are adopting more efficient irrigation techniques, which helps explain the overall drop in water use, but they are also facing decreased water availability due to a spate of recent droughts in the Midwest, Texas and California. With more extreme droughts expected on a warming planet, it’s only a matter of time before corn’s insatiable thirst bumps up against limited water supplies.

To be fair, there’s a reason why water use for corn production continues to climb. U.S. corn farmers are among the most productive in the world, generating another bin-busting harvest in 2014 of 14.2 billion bushels—enough corn to fill a freight train longer than the circumference of the Earth. This production supports a mammoth agricultural sector comprised not just of farmers, but also major food, feed and energy companies.

Nevertheless, corn guzzles more irrigation water than any other crop—an extraordinary fact considering the vast majority of U.S. corn (79 percent) is rain fed and does not rely on irrigation. Irrigation water applied to corn acres rose from 15.4 million acre-feet in 2008 to 17.9 million acre-feet in 2013, paralleling the dramatic increase in corn production during that same period – from 84.5 million to 93.7 million acres.

A key driver in corn’s growing demand for irrigation water is that the crop is increasingly farmed in arid regions such as Kansas, Colorado, Nebraska, and California. Corn production has been expanding into regions with high water stress and groundwater depletion, in part because of the ethanol mandate for gasoline (in 2013, 35 percent of U.S. corn production was used by the ethanol industry). In fact, 87 percent of irrigated corn is now grown in regions with high or extremely high water stress.

Moreover, groundwater, which is dwindling rapidly in many agricultural regions, is the major source of irrigation water for corn. The amount of corn acres using groundwater for irrigation grew 11 percent between 2008 and 2013. More than half of that irrigated corn relies on the over-exploited High Plains aquifer that underlies eight states, including Nebraska, Kansas and Texas.

The good news is that corn farmers are becoming more water efficient. In fact, corn was one of the most water-efficient crops in 2013. Corn grain farmers have become 21 percent more water-efficient on a per acre basis between since 1984. That means they’re applying less water per acre to obtain the same level of production.

On a per bushel basis, the efficiency gains were even greater—45 percent between 1984 and 2013. Farmers were able to get more “crop per drop,” due in part to the replacement of flood irrigation with more-efficient center pivot irrigation. Eighty percent of corn grain acres now use center pivot irrigation.

Yet even with these efficiency gains, we have a problem. There is a fundamental mismatch between irrigation demand for corn production and long-term sustainable water supplies in many of the crop’s key growing regions.

As we seek solutions to water shortages from Kansas to California, addressing the water demands of corn will be critical to sustaining our water resources into the future. Some of the hundreds of major companies that rely on corn are waking up to this fact. For instance, Kellogg and Coca-Cola have begun partnering with corn suppliers, agronomic experts and farmers to measure and improve water efficiency at the field level. But many more companies need to do the same, and urgently.

]]>No publisherBrooke Barton2015-02-10T17:15:00ZBlog ClipInvestors Encourage Further Transparency, Standardization to Spur Green Bond Market Growthhttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-releases/investors-encourage-further-transparency-standardization-to-spur-green-bond-market-growth
As the green bonds market continues to show impressive growth, leading investors released a Statement of Investor Expectations to support the development of a consistent, durable framework for the green bonds market, which has enormous potential to grow, especially in regard to clean energy financing and other solutions to climate change. As the green bonds market continues to show impressive growth, leading investors today released a Statement of Investor Expectations to support the development of a consistent, durable framework for the green bonds market, which has enormous potential to grow, especially in regard to clean energy financing and other solutions to climate change. The investor group was convened by Ceres’ Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network ofmajor institutional investors.

The investor group,made up of substantial purchasers of green bonds including pension funds, insurance companies and asset management firms, voiced support for the Green Bond Principles published in January 2014, and seeks to build on the Principles by addressing the following four key areas that would benefit from further definition and structure:

Eligibility, including general criteria for “green” projects

Disclosure in the Bond Offering Statement, including intended use of proceeds and other actions consistent with investor expectations

Reporting on use of proceeds and project impacts and benefits

Independent assurance

“Green bonds are a critical financing mechanism for the clean energy solutions we urgently need, and the growth and integrity of the market will be supported through clearer standards that provide further guidance to issuers,” said Chris Davis, Director of Investor Programs at the sustainability advocacy group, Ceres, which launched a Clean Trillion campaign last year to boost clean energy investment globally to an additional $1 trillion per year by 2030.

In releasing the Statement, investors underscore the importance of the investment community developing and adhering to clear standards for green bonds – standards that provide further guidance to issuers and support growth of a robust, credible green bond market, which tripled in size in 2014 and is expected to continue growing in the years to come.

"Strong standards and clear disclosure will be crucial for the further development of the green bond market, and we welcome INCR's initiative to provide investors with a dedicated platform to voice their expectations,” said Cecilia Reyes, Chief Investment Officer, Zurich Insurance Group – a member of the green bonds working group convened by INCR. “As one of the major investors in green bonds, Zurich will continue supporting the development of market standards and procedures to ensure the integrity of green bond issues."

Identified by Ceres as one of 10 key drivers of a low-carbon economy in its 2014 Clean Trillion analysis, green bonds will help accelerate private capital flows into clean energy. According to the report, promoting green banking and debt capital markets will “broaden the universe of highly-rated fixed-income products attached to clean energy…making it easier for investors to increase allocations to clean energy within existing liquidity and creditworthiness constraints."

“As an active green bonds investor and a fiduciary for the retirement savings of 868,000 California educators and their families, CalSTRS believes this investor guidance will contribute to a strong and credible green bonds market, and to financing clean energy solutions to the risks posed by climate change,” said Jack Ehnes, CEO of the California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS) - a member of the green bonds working group convened by INCR.

As more investors communicate clear expectations, issuers of green bonds are more likely to structure green issuances in accordance with these guidelines, contributing to the development of bona fide standards. This is a crucial building block for further market growth, and would help issuers better understand the benefits of issuing green bonds, the growing investor demand, and the criteria that leading investors use in evaluating a bond labeled as “green.”

"It has been encouraging to see the growth of the green bond market since the first labeled green bond issued by the World Bank in 2008. This Ceres-led investor initiative is an excellent example of a constructive dialogue among and between investors and issuers, stimulated by green bonds. It is a further step in the right direction for the green bond market," said Doris Herrera-Pol, Director and Global Head of Capital Markets at the World Bank.

About CeresCeres is an advocate for sustainability leadership. Ceres mobilizes a powerful coalition of investors, companies and public interest groups to accelerate and expand the adoption of sustainable business practices and solutions to build a healthy global economy. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of more than 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-02-10T13:48:54ZPress ReleaseBusiness for Innovative Climate & Energy Policy Applauds Washington State Action on Clean Fuel Standardshttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-releases/business-for-innovative-climate-energy-policy-applauds-washington-state-action-on-clean-fuel-standards
BICEP strongly supports enacting a Clean Fuels Standard in Washington. As a flexible market-based mechanism, it allows regulated parties to select the most cost-effective pathways to achieve compliance.Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of leading businesses committed to working with policy makers to enact meaningful energy and climate legislation, commends Governor Inslee for moving forward on a Clean Fuels Standard (CFS) by issuing a draft rule today.

BICEP strongly supports enacting a Clean Fuels Standard in Washington. As a flexible market-based mechanism, it allows regulated parties to select the most cost-effective pathways to achieve compliance. “The CFS will reduce Washington’s dependence on oil and promote low-carbon fuels,” said Anne Kelly, Director of BICEP, “The standards will also create jobs, protect fuel consumers from future price spikes and spur innovation in fuel production techniques.”

California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard demonstrates that clean fuels standards work; it already has cut emissions by 9 million metric tons, and is projected to deliver $1.4 to $4.8 billion in societal benefits by 2020 from reduced air pollution and increased energy security. Washington’s Office of Financial Management recently released an analysis concluding that Washington would also see economic benefits as a result of a CFS, including increased investment in clean fuels produced in Washington.

BICEP is a project of the nonprofit sustainability organization, Ceres, which works with a number of leading Washington companies calling for climate action; 180 of these companies recently signed on to the Washington Business Climate Declaration. BICEP looks forward to continuing to support the development of a CFS in Washington.

About BICEPBusiness for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), a project of Ceres, is an advocacy coalition of 34 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation enabling a rapid transition to a low-carbon, 21st century economy – an economy that will create new jobs and stimulate economic growth while stabilizing our planet’s fragile climate. Members include Vulcan, eBay, Gap Inc, General Mills, KB Home, Levi Straus & Co. Mars Inc. and Owens Corning. For more information and a complete list of member companies visit: http://www.ceres.org/bicep or @BICEPNews.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-02-04T20:33:35ZPress ReleaseConsumer Brands and Investors Attend State Energy Official Meeting to Advocate Clean Energy Policieshttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-releases/consumer-brands-and-investors-attend-state-energy-official-meeting-to-advocate-clean-energy-policies
Today state energy officials from twelve states, including Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, and Pennsylvania met with eBay, General Mills and Unilever to discuss corporate adoption of renewable energy and energy efficiency, and the implications for state policy, at the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) 2015 Energy Policy Outlook Conference.Today state energy officials from twelve states, including Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, and Pennsylvania met with eBay, General Mills and Unilever to discuss corporate adoption of renewable energy and energy efficiency, and the implications for state policy, at the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) 2015 Energy Policy Outlook Conference.

The three consumer brands are members of Ceres’ Business for Innovative Climate And Energy Policy coalition. Together with Impax Asset Management and Calvert Investments, the companies and investors met with energy officials to detail their efforts to expand clean energy investment, and the polices needed to help them do more, such as third-party power purchase agreements, state renewable portfolio standards and the Clean Power Plan.

Though the meeting employed Chatham House Rules, meeting participants offered the following comments about the first-of-its-kind encounter involving consumer brands and investors, cosponsored by Ceres and NASEO.

"Eliminating energy waste is a no-regrets decision for Michigan," said Michigan Energy Office Director, Robert Jackson. "We’ve looked at the issues closely and believe there is more technical potential in both energy waste elimination, renewable energy, and natural gas generation than what is currently in place in Michigan. We’re eager to partner with corporations and investors to help tap some of that potential.”

“Unilever has reduced its manufacturing emissions over 30% in the past five years and we’re committed to going even further,” said Stefani Millie Grant, manager of state government relations & external affairs, Unilever North America. “We have begun to build a portfolio of renewable energy projects to meet the needs of 100% of our U.S. operations. Unilever and other leading companies are showing what’s possible and we support smart energy policies in line with these commitments.”

“eBay is committed to achieving its clean energy targets,” said Caitlin Brosseau, senior manager of government affairs. “As part of this commitment we worked with the Utah legislature to pass a bill making contracting for renewable power possible in the state.” The legislation has enabled eBay to power its data center in South Jordan, Utah with solar, fuel cells and waste heat.

“As investors in a wide range of companies—from utilities to consumer goods companies—we’re always dismayed to hear the antiquated argument that policies intended to reduce pollution are bad for business,” said Stu Dalheim, a vice president at Calvert Investments, which is a member of Ceres’ Investor Network on Climate Risk. “In fact, we believe the standards EPA has proposed for power plant carbon emissions provide an opportunity to scale policies that work and catalyze corporate clean energy efforts.”

“Missouri is committed to attracting new business to our state and ensuring that we have clean, affordable, and reliable energy. Companies like electronics manufacturer Emerson Electric and solar financier Sun Edison call Missouri home,” said Kristy Manning, deputy director for policy at the Missouri Department of Economic Development’s Division of Energy. “Under Governor Nixon’s direction, we’ve been collecting comments in forums around the state and online. We just closed our comment period last week and are looking forward to crafting a plan for a sustainable energy future for the state.”

"Some policymakers worry about business opposition to clean energy,' said Brandon Smithwood, a senior manager on Ceres' policy team. "But these companies and investors are ahead of even the most ambitious policies. Clean energy is the new business norm."

Policy Support Needed for Corporate Clean Energy Deployment

Unilever and eBay’s commitment to clean energy is a growing trend. According to a recent report, Power Forward 2.0, 43 percent of Fortune 500 companies have a greenhouse gas goal, renewable energy goal, or energy efficiency goal. Among the largest Fortune 100 companies, 60 percent have goals and are saving a combined $1.1 billion in energy costs annually through their efforts.

Currently several states, including Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina have restrictions which preclude companies and homeowners from contracting with non-utility providers of renewable energy, in a third-party power purchase agreement (PPA). Power Forward 2.0 found that the ability to enter these contracts is key to many companies’ clean energy strategies.

State renewable portfolio standards, which are in place in a majority of US states, are also identified in Power Forward 2.0 as important policies for facilitating corporate renewable energy adoption. These standards have been the target of legislative attacks in several states recently, but they are likely to be a key component of many states’ compliance with pending federal rules on carbon emissions from power plants.

"Due to the diversity of opinion among the states, NASEO has not taken a position on EPA's proposed carbon rules for existing power plants," said David Terry, Executive Director of the National Association of State Energy Officials. "However, our members have a track record of implementing robust energy efficiency programs in partnership with the private sector. The states are united in their commitment to ensure EPA's proposed rule maintains electric system reliability and allows states to maximize cost-effective energy efficiency and renewable energy efforts as one means of compliance should the rule move forward. To this end, we're exited to leverage the growing private sector activity by companies and investors like those in the room today."

About CeresCeres is an advocate for sustainability leadership. Ceres mobilizes a powerful coalition of investors, companies and public interest groups to accelerate and expand the adoption of sustainable business practices and solutions to build a healthy global economy. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of more than 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.

About NASEONASEO is the only national non-profit association for the governor-designated energy officials from each of the 56 states and territories. Formed by the states in 1986, NASEO facilitates peer learning among state energy officials, serves as a resource for and about state energy offices, and advocates the interests of the state energy offices to Congress and federal agencies.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-02-03T17:35:00ZPress ReleaseBoston nonprofit Ceres stresses green efforthttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/boston-nonprofit-ceres-stresses-green-effort
Ceres, celebrating its 25th anniversary, has become one of the world’s most influential environmental advocates by harnessing capitalism to convince companies that sustainability is central to their competitiveness and bottom lines.Its philosophy: Good environmental policy is good for business

In 2007, the technology giant EMC Corp. turned to a Boston nonprofit to help it become more environmentally sensitive — but worried that relations could become tense.

The nonprofit, Ceres, insisted that the Hopkinton company open its boardroom to financial, environmental, and social issue specialists, including critics ready to tell executives things they might not want to hear. But the relationship proved productive, and EMC, by one measure, reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent from 2005 and energy consumption per employee by more than 35 percent.

“The intent is not to get yelled at,” said Kathrin R. Winkler, EMC chief sustainability officer. “The intent is to collaborate to find ways to move the needle.”

Ceres, celebrating its 25th anniversary, has become one of the world’s most influential environmental advocates by harnessing capitalism to convince companies that sustainability is central to their competitiveness and bottom lines. Ceres pushes its way into corporate boardrooms by enlisting a network of some of the nation’s biggest institutional investors — including the $300 billion California Public Employees Retirement System — and once there demonstrates how combating climate change, cutting energy use, and preventing damage to the environment is in firms’ economic interests.

Ceres has spurred multinational corporations such as PepsiCo Inc., Nike Inc., and Ford Motor Co. to change the way they act on climate change, including Ford’s support of higher fuel-efficiency standards. In addition, the nonprofit has persuaded more than 1,000 companies, including General Motors and Apple, to sign the nonprofit’s “Climate Declaration” urging Congress to adopt new laws to combat global warming.

“What will change the debate on climate in the US Congress,” Ceres chief executive Mindy S. Lubber said, “will be when leaders of the largest economic firms and financial firms go up and say, ‘We need to act because this is hurting us financially.’ ”

From its offices on Chauncey Street, Ceres also has become a significant player in the international climate debate, demonstrating that producing less waste and using renewables helps a company’s bottom line. Lubber has spoken at the United Nations, last year addressing 500 global financial players at the Investor Summit on Climate Risk, and the World Economic Forum, a gathering of policymakers, intellectuals, political leaders, and corporate executives, in Davos, Switzerland.

Ceres was founded in 1989, just months after the Exxon Valdez oil spill that dumped more than 250,000 barrels along a pristine section of Alaska’s coastline and ultimately cost Exxon, now ExxonMobil, more than $4.3 billion in penalties, lawsuits, and cleanup costs. The disaster inspired the idea that still drives Ceres: Corporations are harmed financially when they don’t pay attention to the environment — and that matters to investors.

Ceres today works closely with 65 companies, stressing that if businesses manage their waste, energy, and supply chain well, it shows they can manage the entire enterprise, attracting investors, customers, and employees.

“They were one of the first to articulate the economic as opposed to the ethical argument in terms of investing,” said Geoffrey M. Heal, a professor at Columbia Business School who teaches the business of sustainability. Heal called Ceres a “forceful player” and said, “They’ve set out the arguments clearly.”

Ceres’s clout with corporations comes from its network of 110 institutional investors, which see the connection between sustainability and profitability, including public pension funds in New York and California. All told, these investors control $13 trillion.

“We’re thinking decades, generations out,” said Anne Stausboll, chief executive of the California Public Employees Retirement System and cochair of the Ceres board. “We have a lot of focus on long-term sustainability.”

This support makes it much easier for Ceres to open the doors to corporations, where the nonprofit aims to make decision-makers aware of their companies’ environmental and social effects. The backing gives Ceres the clout to insist on buy-in at the chief executive level, access to company data, and rigorous examination of operations by investors, environmental specialists, and social activists chosen by the nonprofit.

The companies then pay Ceres for this work.

Bloomberg L.P., the financial data and news organization, enlisted Ceres in 2008. Ceres has helped Bloomberg determine how to reduce its carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2020 from what it was in 2007, a period during which the company will double in size. Among the steps: using energy-efficient LED lighting and encouraging recycling and composting at its facilities.

Curtis Ravenel, global head of sustainability at Bloomberg, said Ceres was able to challenge the company’s practices and drive change, without being adversarial.

“What I like about Ceres is that they are aggressive, but not too aggressive,” Ravenel said. “You want them to be pushing you. That’s why I hired them, to keep us honest.”

Heal, the Columbia professor, said it’s difficult to measure the effect that Ceres has had. Investors and companies are much more aware of climate change, partly because of the media attention, partly because of Ceres, and partly because of other players, he said. “They’re pushing on a door that’s slowly opening anyway,” he said.

Lubber, however, maintains that Ceres is responsible for significant changes in attitudes about climate change in capital markets. The organization, for example, was a partner in a 2011 Citigroup report that made an economic case for increasing fuel efficiency standards in the auto industry.

Following the report, the average fuel economy standard was raised to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, with the support of GM and Ford, both of which work with Ceres.

Ceres officials also want corporations to include environmental data, such as greenhouse gas emissions and reductions in toxic materials into regular earnings reports so investors can weigh their progress on these issues.

Already, some 6,000 companies voluntarily disclose greenhouse gas and energy efficiency data through a program created by Ceres and later spun off as an independent organization known as the Global Reporting Initiative.

As companies and investors learn the economic benefits of sustainable practices, Ceres hopes that they’ll work to convince lawmakers that acting on climate change is not only good policy, but also good for their businesses. After all, Lubber said, money talks.

“That’s part of our theory of change,” she said, “that investors care about these issues and care mightily.”

Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy, or BICEP, includes more than 30 consumer companies that advocate for energy and climate legislation.

Clean Trillion Ceres has a goal of seeing annual global investments in clean energy increase from $281 billion in 2012 to $500 billion in 2020 and $1 trillion by 2030.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-02-02T14:20:19ZPress ClipShell bows to investor pressure on climate riskhttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/shell-bows-to-investor-pressure-on-climate-risk
In a rare move, oil major Shell on Thursday backed a resolution proposed by activist investors to force the company to recognize climate change risks by improving its transparency.In a rare move, oil major Shell on Thursday backed a resolution proposed by activist investors to force the company to recognize climate change risks by improving its transparency.

Shell's executive vice president of investor relations JJ Traynor said the company would urge shareholders to vote for the resolution at the annual general meeting in May.

The announcement coincided with Shell saying Thursday that it would cut $15 billion in spending but continue to drill in Alaska's Arctic.

The resolution was filed by the Aiming for A coalition of UK investors representing close to £200 billion ($300 billion) in assets and calls on Shell to disclose additional information in five areas related to climate change in its annual reporting from 2016.

The group said in the resolution it was concerned about the "longer term success of the company, given the recognized risks and opportunities associated with climate change."

The resolution requests more information on the company's operational emissions management, the resilience of its assets to climate change, low-carbon energy research and development and investment strategies, relevant key performance indicators and its public policy positions on climate change.

Shell said the company will provide the additional disclosures in its next annual report.

With global oil prices falling around 60 percent since June, public interest and shareholder groups have been warning energy firms about the financial and climate risks of investment in carbon-intensive fossil fuel projects.

ConocoPhillips, which previously announced plans to cut 2015 spending by 20 percent in December, announced Thursday it would slash a further $2 billion in spending. South Africa's Sasol also announced it would shelve an $11 billion gulf coast gas-to-liquid plant.

Andrew Logan, an analyst at sustainability-focused investor group Ceres, said such moves by a company to recommend an activist group's resolution is rare and reflects the pressure placed on Shell to address climate change.

Logan said, however, that Shell is likely to face more investor scrutiny because of its decision to move ahead on drilling in Alaska's Arctic.

"Investors will be watching closely to see how the company explains that decision in light of the concerns raised in the shareholder proposal that Shell itself now says it supports," Logan said.

Barrister Elspeth Owens of shareholder group ClientEarth, which assisted with the filing of the resolution, said the Shell decision "throws down the gauntlet for BP," which received the same resolution by Aiming for A earlier in January.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-01-29T21:05:59ZPress ClipShell urges shareholders to accept climate resolutionhttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/shell-urges-shareholders-to-accept-climate-resolution
Shell is set to confront the risk that climate change may pose to its future, after backing a resolution from activist shareholders. The move came on the same day it announced $15bn (£10bn) in cost cutting due to plummeting oil prices and said it wanted to resume drilling for oil in the Arctic.Resolution brought by activist shareholders requires oil firm to test its business model is compatible with global targets to limit global warming

The resolution, filed by 150 investors who control hundreds of billions of pounds, requires the oil major to test whether its business model is compatible with the pledge by the world’s nations to limit global warming to 2C.

The resolution, also filed with BP, includes a ban on corporate bonuses for climate-harming activities and a commitment to invest in renewable energy.

“This is a turning point and demonstrates the power of activist strategies to deal with climate change,” said Catherine Howarth, chief executive of ShareAction, which helped coordinate the resolutions.

“We maintain our commitment to engage with shareholders in this area,” said Shell’s executive vice president JJ Traynor, in a letter to shareholders, in which he asked them to back the resolution. “We look forward to implementing the resolution should it be passed at the AGM.” The proposal will need the support of 75% of shareholders to pass in May.

“This is a huge victory for the climate, which demonstrates the power of positive shareholder engagement,” said Elspeth Owens, at environmental legal group ClientEarth, which also helped coordinate the resolutions. “The vast majority of Shell shareholders are now likely to vote in support. This throws down the gauntlet for BP to face up to its climate risk.”

But other investors argue engaging with companies through shareholder resolutions, for example, has more effect.

“We think our supportive but stretching shareholder resolutions could help focus attention on this increasingly complex challenge for companies, investors and policy makers,” said Helen Wildsmith, at CCLA, a coalition of UK local authority pension funds many of whom co-filed the BP and Shell resolutions.

“We view Shell’s decision as a potential turning point in investor engagement with the industry on carbon asset risk,” said Andrew Logan, oil & gas program director at the sustainability group Ceres, whose Investor Network on Climate Risk has 110 institutional investors with collective assets of $13 trillion. “However, investors will be closely scrutinizing Shell’s disclosures, particularly in light of its decision today to greenlight drilling in the Alaskan Arctic, one of the highest cost and highest risk projects in its entire portfolio.”

Major funds around the world are becoming increasingly concerned that limits on carbon emissions will harm the finances of fossil fuel companies and lead to investors losing money.

One of the largest institutional investors in the world, the $177bn New York State Common Retirement Fund, issued a new warning on Thursday. “We are obviously very concerned about the wellbeing of the fund, which is heavily invested in energy stocks worldwide,” said Pete Grannis, New York State deputy comptroller, whose office is the sole trustee of the fund, which has one million members.

In advance of ExxonMobil, Shell and BP quarterly earnings calls, investors and industry analysts today voiced growing concerns about excessive industry spending on high-cost, high-carbon fossil fuel projects that may be bad financial bets as the world continues to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, accelerate renewable energy and reduce overall carbon emissions to counter the threat of climate change.

On a call hosted today by Ceres, major U.S. and European investors described how plummeting oil prices and resulting ripples across global energy markets highlight the significant inherent risks of continuing to invest hundreds of billions of dollars each year in high cost reserves that will only break even if oil prices remain at $90 a barrel or higher. Investors also discussed shareholder resolutions they have filed on the topic with a dozen oil and gas firms, including producers, pipeline companies and exploration firms.

“Investors must question industry assumptions and challenge capital expenditure at the wrong end of the cost curve,” said Jeremy Leggett, chairman of Carbon Tracker. “It is not too late for the transition to a lower-carbon economy to be an orderly one, with fossil fuel companies steadily shrinking overall but delivering the best results for their shareholders by focusing on returns and per share metrics.”

While oil companies have cancelled or delayed numerous projects in recent months, investors are concerned that the industry is still fully intent on forging ahead with major capital spending based on ‘business as usual’ assumptions that today’s oil prices are simply a bump in the road and that oil demand growth and higher prices will be the norm for decades to come.

“Addressing carbon asset risk is at the heart of corporate governance, which is why we engage portfolio companies to bring environmental expertise into the boardroom and challenge business as usual,” said New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. “The industry should take meaningful steps to mitigate its financial exposure and protect shareholder value by ensuring that its capital investment strategy incorporates consideration and mitigation of climate change related risks.”

Through disclosure requests, in-person meetings and shareholder resolutions, investors are questioning the wisdom of these companies’ strategies as the world is moving to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, accelerate renewable energy and reduce overall carbon emissions to counter the threat of climate change.

“Climate change and associated public policy uncertainty create material risks for investors," said Helen Wildsmith, Head of Ethical & Responsible Investment at CCLA.

"We think our supportive but stretching shareholder resolutions at BP and Shell could help focus attention on this increasingly complex capital allocation challenge for companies, investors and policy makers." CCLA is coordinating a coalition of 50 church, charity and public sector investors that has filed resolutions with BP and Shell.

The International Energy Agency says the world must invest at least an additional $1 trillion per year – a Clean Trillion – into clean energy in order to limit the worst impacts of climate change and protect the global economy. According to data released this month by Bloomberg New Energy Finance, global clean energy investments grew 16 percent in 2014 to $310 billion. Yet fossil fuel companies are clinging to antiquated business strategies, and invested an estimated $674 billion into finding and developing new reserves in 2012 alone. And a new report released today by Carbon Tracker outlines why investors must challenge industry assumptions, and how recent reports by IHS Herold and IPIECA - the global oil and gas industry association - are complacent about the future of oil and gas.

“The oil majors should view this as an opportunity to transform their industry,” said Andrew Logan, oil & gas program director at Ceres, a nonprofit sustainability organization. “The window is closing for Exxon, Shell and the other oil majors to position themselves for a future that is less dependent on fossil fuels.”

Through the Carbon Asset Risk (CAR) Initiative, 75 investors managing more than $3 trillion in assets have called on 45 of the world’s largest fossil fuel companies to assess and disclose how their business plans fare in a world turned upside down by unchecked climate change. The CAR initiative is coordinated by Ceres and Carbon Tracker, with support from IIGCC and IGCC. For more information, visit http://www.ceres.org/issues/carbon-asset-risk.

About CeresCeres is an advocate for sustainability leadership. Ceres mobilizes a powerful coalition of investors, companies and public interest groups to accelerate and expand the adoption of sustainable business practices and solutions to build a healthy global economy. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of more than 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-01-29T15:00:00ZPress ReleaseAndersen Signs Ceres Climate Declaration, Declares Goal to Reduce Solid Waste, Energy and Water Use 20 percent by 2020http://www.ceres.org/press/press-releases/andersen-signs-ceres-climate-declaration-declares-goal-to-reduce-solid-waste-energy-and-water-use-20-percent-by-2020
Andersen Corporation announced today that it has signed the Ceres Climate Declaration on behalf of its Andersen® Windows, Renewal by Andersen® and Silver Line® brands. The Climate Declaration works to accelerate the adoption of sustainable business practices to build a healthy global economy.Andersen Corporation announced today that it has signed the Ceres Climate Declaration on behalf of its Andersen® Windows, Renewal by Andersen® and Silver Line® brands. The Climate Declaration works to accelerate the adoption of sustainable business practices to build a healthy global economy. Andersen is the first window and door manufacturer, and just the second in the building industry, to sign the declaration, which also champions the innovative environmental actions already taking place within U.S. companies.

In addition to signing the Climate Declaration, Andersen also announced new corporate sustainability goals, which are to reduce solid waste, energy and water use by 20 percent per unit of product, by 2020, using 2013 as a baseline. The company is also the first major window and door manufacturer to declare measurable sustainability goals.

“Buildings are responsible for a significant proportion of global greenhouse gas emissions,” said Jay Lund, chairman, president and CEO of Andersen Corporation. “Adding our signature to this declaration affirms our responsibility and commitment to provide energy efficient products that can be part of the solution. Our sustainability goals go a step further to demonstrate how we put our support to action within our own operations.”

“Andersen Corporation has long championed that integrating sustainability in to operations is smart business,” said Mindy Lubber, president of Ceres, “Signing Ceres’ Climate Declaration makes the commitment public, and it’s the right thing to do.” Ceres, a 25-year-old nonprofit organization, created the Climate Declaration as a way to accelerate the adoption of sustainable business practices to build a healthy global economy. The Climate Declaration was drafted in 2013 through the group’s Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP) coalition, and launched with 33 founding signatories. Since then, more than 1,250 companies have joined them, signing on to show their support.

“Signing this declaration is one more step in our evolution as an industry leader,” Lund said, “and it exemplifies our drive for ongoing improvement across our full product lifecycle – from the forest, to our operations, to our customers’ homes and ultimately our communities.”

About CeresCeres is an advocate for sustainability leadership. Ceres mobilizes a powerful coalition of investors, companies and public interest groups to accelerate and expand the adoption of sustainable business practices and solutions to build a healthy global economy. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), a network of over 100 institutional investors with collective assets totaling more than $13 trillion. Ceres also directs Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), an advocacy coalition of more than 30 businesses committed to working with policy makers to pass meaningful energy and climate legislation. For more information, visit www.ceres.org or follow on Twitter @CeresNews.

About Andersen CorporationHeadquartered in Bayport, Minnesota, Andersen Corporation includes Andersen Windows, Inc., Renewal by Andersen LLC, and Silver Line Building Products LLC. Andersen employs more than 10,000 people in locations across North America with sales worldwide. The company is committed to supporting the community, donating more than $55 million to nonprofit organizations through its foundation. Visit us at www.andersencorporation.com.

]]>No publisherMegan Doherty2015-01-29T14:30:00ZPress ReleaseWhy businesses should support the EPA's pollution ruleshttp://www.ceres.org/press/press-clips/why-businesses-should-support-the-epas-pollution-rules
As the US political fight over climate change moves from Washington DC to 50 state capitals, companies that are serious about sustainability need to support the EPA’s proposed rules to curb carbon pollution from existing power plants.As the US political fight over climate change moves from Washington DC to 50 state capitals, companies that are serious about sustainability need to support the EPA’s proposed rules to curb carbon pollution from existing power plants.

So, at least, says Mindy Lubber, the president of Ceres, a nonprofit that brings together companies, investors and public-interest groups to advocate for sustainability.

“Companies have the strength and power – the footprint to make a huge difference,” Lubber told me at a lunch earlier this month. Ceres celebrates its 25th anniversary Tuesday.

It’s hard to overstate the importance of the proposed power plant rules, which are the cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s climate agenda. Power plants account for nearly 40% of all US greenhouse gas emissions.

The EPA is asking each state to develop a plan to meet federally mandated carbon limits. But 29 of 50 states are now led by Republican governors, most of whom are likely to oppose the new rules. If the EPA effort falls flat, there’s no way the US can lead the way to a global climate agreement.

Ceres and Lubber have set out to persuade corporations to support the EPA and the president, and overcome their habitual, instinctive resistance to government regulation. “It is going to be long and tedious and complicated,” Lubber admits. “And really hard.”

Boston-based Ceres, one of a handful of US green groups to focus on business, has never shied away from complex, unglamorous environmental work.

Formed in 1989 in the wake of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Ceres has helped make sustainability reporting a common practice, developed best practices for corporate sustainability, promoted corporate buying of renewable power and spotlighted climate risk in the insurance industry, all in an effort to find common ground among capitalists and environmentalists.

By some measures, Ceres has had considerable impact. Corporate responsibility reports – an idea birthed by Ceres in the late 1990s – are now widespread.

Increasingly, big mainstream companies – Lubber cites General Electric, PepsiCo, Disney and the Detroit automakers, along with the usual suspects like Unilever and Ikea – regard sustainability and climate change as core business issues that require the attention of top executives and corporate boards.

“The conversation has changed,” Lubber says. “It’s remarkable.”

Ceres’ work with institutional investors has made a difference, too. Some investors, particularly those who take the long view, have come to see climate change and water scarcity as financial risks that need to be disclosed and addressed by corporates.

“I can tell you with certainty that the [US Securities and Exchange Commission] would not have mandated the disclosure of climate risk if it had not been for the investors coming to them, petitioning, lobbying,” Lubber says, even if compliance with the SEC guidance has been spotty.

Even among the biggest companies, many of whom have pledged to curb their environmental footprint, carbon emissions are rising at an unsustainable rate. Scientists say emissions need to decline sharply to avoid catastrophic climate impacts.

But instead of shrinking, self-reported greenhouse gas emissions from the world’s 500 largest businesses – companies that are often noisy about their sustainability commitments – actually grew by 3.1% between 2010 and 2013, according to a worrisome Thomson Reuters report released last month.

That’s why it’s important for companies to support the EPA’s power plant rules, Lubber says. Mandating that existing power plants cut US carbon-dioxide emissions by 30% by 2030 from 2005 levels would bend the emissions curve downwards.

Last month, Ceres released a statement supporting the rules that was signed by more than 200 companies, many small or midsized. Big firms to sign on included Ikea, Kellogg, Levi Strauss, Mars, Nestle, Nike, Novelis, VF and Unilever.

By contrast, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the America Petroleum Institute, the National Association of Manufacturers, the National Mining Association and the US Chamber of Commerce, which represents many thousands of businesses, have formed a coalition called the Partnership for a Better Energy Future to oppose the EPA rules.

The group says the EPA’s rules will raise electricity costs, increase blackouts, destroy jobs and damage America’s competitive position in global markets.

It’s this kind of position – pitting the environment against the economy – that Ceres and Lubber hope to head off by persuading more companies to speak out about the need for climate action. She holds out hope that business voices can help turn political conservatives’ opinions around.

After all, she says, liberals and conservatives alike “would throw themselves in front of a bus to save their grandkid. And we’ve got this bus coming at us”.